The Hybrid Regimes of Central America (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Social Origins of Dictatorship, Democracy and Socialist Revolution in Central America
Revolutions in the Third World, 1991
We are all students of Barrington Moore, Jr., not only those of us on the panel like Professors Skocpol and Tilly, who had the privilege of studying directly with him, or like Professor Goldstone, with one of his students (in this case Professor Skocpol), but also those like Professors Brustein, Eckstein and myself who have been profoundly influenced by his work. It would be fair to say that Barrington Moore, Jr. created the modern study of revolution just as he contributed profoundly to the current golden age of comparative historical sociology and the revival of political sociology represented by this section. In this year of anniversaries of revolutions great and small, the French, the Chinese, the Cuban, the Nicaraguan, it is only fitting that we turn to an examination of the ideas of a man who restored the study of revolution to a central place at the core of the sociological discipline. H i s Social of D-.. remains the most widely accepted and influential theory not only of revolution but of the origins of democracy, authoritarianism, and revolutionary socialism El Salvador, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua, three small countries in a region that was once the most obscure corner of the sp&ish colonial empire, m a y seem a strange place to begin an. evaluation of a theory based on studies of the great revolutions, the French, the Chinese, and implicitly but fundamentally, the Russian. Indeed Moore himself (1966, xiii) cautions against the study of small countries since "the decisive causes of their politics lie outside their boundaries," although he acknowledges a certain discomfort a t bypassing some worthy, if diminutive, revolutions in such obscure places as the Korean peninsula, Cuba, and Indochina. But the cases of Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Nicaragua present us with a fortuitous natural experiment in the study of revolutions since they contain within themselves Moore's three routes into the modern political worlddemocracy, authoritarianism, and revolutionary socialism. Indeed, it would be difficult to find three political systems anywhere in the world that differ among themselves as much as do contemporary Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Nicaragua. Costa Rica has the longest lived democracy in Latin America. Since 1889, when it held the first fully free election in Latin America, Costa Rica has, with the exception of two brief periods in
Political Systems in Central America. A Compared Historical Analysis
Temas de nuestra américa. Revista de estudios Latinoamericanos, 2018
This study aims to compare the political systems in Central America from a historical perspective. Here, Central America is considered as a very diverse region in experiences and quality of democracy; Costa Rica is the most successful, historical, contemporary case in the subregion. In the rest of the countries, there are relatively young and fragile democracies, without historical experiences of democracy, with very weak States, without social consensus, and with limited citizenship that is treated in a clientelist manner and is a victim of poverty and inequality.
Assessing the 'Arrival of Democracy' in Central America
2014
Review essay: - Central America in the New Millennium: Living Transition and Reimagining Democracy, edited by Jennifer L. Burrell and Ellen Moodie. CEDLA Latin America Studies (CLAS) Vol. 102. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2013. – The Politics of Modern Central America: Civil War, Democratization, and Underdevelopment, by Fabrice Lehoucq. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. – Handbook of Central American Governance, edited by Diego Sánchez-Ancochea and Salvador Martí i Puig. Milton Park and New York: Routledge, 2014.
Successful and Aborted Democratization in Central America: Visible and Invisible Politics
Costa Rica and Guatemala are the only countries in Central American that participated in the wave of democratization that followed the Second World War--the “second wave”. In the early 1940s, democratic politics expanded in both countries through the incorporation of previously excluded groups to state politics. This expansion, which took place through different mechanisms in Costa Rica (elections) and Guatemala (military coup), led to a shift in favor of reform policies as new demands incorporated into state politics.
Democratization and the Revitalization of Popular Movements in Central America
2015
Democratization largely occurred in Central America at the end of the twentieth century. The region also experienced two waves of antineo liberal protest during this democratic transition. Beginning in the late 1990s, the region’s fifty million inhabitants experienced an upsurge in popular movement activity against economic policies directly related to economic glob alization. Examples of this wave of contention include the campaigns against new sales taxes and free trade in Guatemala; mobilizations against privatization and free trade in Honduras, Costa Rica, and El Salvador; struggles against the pension system and labor reforms in Panama; and major protests against con sumer price hikes in Nicaragua. More than any other social grievance or issue, economic liberalization measures motivated the largest mass mobilizations in the region over the past two decades (Almeida 2014). These struggles are char acterized by a more open political context in which traditional social sectors...
1992
As the 1990s opened, the only country in Central America that could claim to hold periodic free and fair elections was Costa Rica. El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua all had held elections, but this inchoate "electoral politics" still fell considerably short of democratic politics. In general, there was little effective participation or broad-based representation and little political accountability between the elected officials and their supporters, and elected officials had limited power visA -vis a still-dominant military and, in some cases, a still-powerful oligarchy. After colonial times in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Honduras powerful, entrenched classes led by landed interests (but also including commercial and financial elites) and powerful military institutions opposed, often brutally, groups that sought to create democratic political institutions. Following World War II, however, the defense of the existing land tenure system, of related economic interests, and of military power and privilege became more difficult, as important We would like to thank Elisabeth Escalante for her comments and assistance. We also want to thank Rodrigo Carazo, William M. LeoGrande, and the other members of the conference for their comments.
Political change and socioeconomic policies in Central America: patterns of interaction
During the 1980s, two ® elds of analysis received m ost attention from political scientists. In W estern Europe the crisis of the Keynesian welfare state gave rise to a vast academic and political debate. The discussion developed in a period of political stability. In Latin America the collapse of the authoritarian regimes gave the debates on transitions to democracy a privileged place in the academic and political agenda. Such controversies were held in a context of delayed social and econom ic problems. During the 1990s, the evolution of the political scenario has m odi® ed academic priorities. In Europe the initial debate on state±m arket relations has been largely replaced by a discussion on new forms of governance in com plex societies. The emergent agenda now includes basic political points like institutions and party systems. M eanwhile, the end of the transition processes in Latin Am erica has reopened the door for a discussion on the contents of social and economic policies. 1 W ithout considering this debate, it m ay be extremely dif® cult to understand the current problems faced by m ost Latin Am erican countries during the democratic consolidation period. This line of reasoning also applies to Central America; nevertheless, this region has rem arkable particularities. Developm ental m odels and strategies are not easily exported and what may have been successful in other areas has faced additional dif® culties in the social and political context of Central America. The previous patrimonial state model, the level of underdevelopment, the greater class inequalities, the prominent role of armed con¯ict over the transition period and the diverse degrees of political change have markedly constrained the development of social and economic policies. In addition, this particular situation does not m ake viable attempts to understand the reality of the area with the analytical tools of m ainstream transition theory which were applied to the m ain